A debate over the juvenile process following Saturday’s fight in Salisbury
Published 12:10 am Wednesday, May 21, 2025
By Elisabeth Strillacci
SALISBURY — A fight among a group of juveniles that broke out at Bell Tower Green during the Cheerwine Festival Saturday afternoon resulted in serious injuries to two police officers, one from the Salisbury Police Department and one from the Rowan County Sheriff’s Office, and yet a request to allow the juveniles be taken into custody was denied by court counselors.
And that decision has not made Rowan County Sheriff Travis Allen happy, though the investigation remains ongoing, and officials from both the judicial system and Salisbury police say the case is far from closed.
Salisbury police spent weeks planning for annual festival, making sure all necessary security precautions were taken and staff was in place to provide a safe, pleasant day for the thousands that would come through the city from morning until night, Allen said in a statement on the incident issued Monday night.
“The city of Salisbury Police Department and the city of Salisbury did an excellent job of coordinating the emergency service and security plan for this event,” said Allen in his statement. “Law enforcement officers and emergency personnel were coordinated and supervised in a way that made this event one of safety, security and fun.” Allen noted he was at the event nearly all day, joined by his family in the afternoon. He noted that the festival has become known as a “fantastic community event where tens of thousands attend from across the county, the state and even the Southeastern U.S. to enjoy a day of food, music, shopping and festivities.”
But Allen and others have expressed anger and even outrage that a group of approximately 10 juveniles “decided to dampen the festival by their riotous and criminal behavior,” he said.
A fight broke out among a number of young men who were surrounded by other youth at the park. A large contingent of officers from Salisbury and RCSO immediately responded to the scene, trying to restore order, but although officers immediately ordered the crowd to break up, they did not. At least one video of the incident hit social media almost immediately, and in it, viewers can see a Salisbury officer hit the concrete sidewalk and not move after being dragged forward in the midst of a crowd of young men as he was trying to hold them back. The scene was chaotic and unfolded incredibly quickly.
Reports have indicated this was the only significant incident from the entire day and, according to Allen, “was quickly dealt with by the dozens of law enforcement officers on the scene.”
Allen went on to say he believes the “laws of the State of North Carolina have stripped the enforcement power of law enforcement officials in combating these issues. The only thing that street criminals understand is force and consequence. Right now, there is neither to offset their actions. It is time that parents and guardians be held criminally and civilly responsible for the actions of these unsupervised and out-of-control minors.”
Allen said he has asked that the Juvenile Justice Department grant secure custody orders on “every minor involved in the incident,” saying police should be “granted authority to re-arrest these individuals and hold them accountable for their actions.” He added that he believes without consequences, juveniles are not learning accountability or responsibility.
But according to Dixon, denying the original request was a logical initial action, since there was no information at that time about the severity of the officers’ injuries, and in state regulations regarding an application for nonsecure custody, “the court shall first consider release of the juvenile to the juvenile’s parent, guardian, custodian or other responsible adult,” according to NC General Statute 7B-1903. The statute also states if the request is for secure custody, “the court may order secure custody only where the court finds there is a reasonable factual basis to believe that the juvenile committed the offense as alleged in the petition, and that one of the following circumstances exists” and it goes on to list nine different circumstances, one of which must apply.
The first two circumstances may have applied had it been clear about the officers’ injuries, as those two state, “1) The juvenile is charged with a felony and has demonstrated that the juvenile is a danger to property or persons; 2) The juvenile has demonstrated that the juvenile is a danger to persons and is charged with either (i) a misdemeanor at least one element of which is assault on a person or (ii) a misdemeanor in which the juvenile used, threatened to use, or displayed a firearm or other deadly weapon.”
However, not all the information was available at the time the original request was made, and counselors can only act on the information they are given. Dixon said that while she understands Allen and anyone else being distressed about the officers’ injuries, “including our staff,” she believes energy is better directed at legislators to effect changes in laws.
“We are tasked with enforcing the laws as they are written,” she said. “If you don’t like them, call your legislators, but don’t attack those who are only trying to enforce what is current law.”
